Understanding the Growth Potential within the Building Technologies Market

Share Article

Overall, the main objective of this study was to identify levels of familiarity with 12 building technologies, measure their usage rates and evaluate the impact that one has on the other. Moreover, the following research attempts to determine which building technologies have the highest and the lowest growth potentials, based on the current usage and likelihood of adoption rates. Lastly, it identifies factors that are most important in the decision making processes and evaluates brand usage, uncovering areas of market fragmentation and brand dominance. A Web-based survey was utilized to survey 154 facility managers, directors, and executives distributed across nine different industries from June to July 2012.

Research Objectives

-Identify the familiarity of the following building technologies:
oAir purification
oBiosolids and sludge
oCloud-based systems for security management
oEnergy management systems
oEnterprise management solutions
oFire suppression and detection systems
oIntegrated building automation, control and monitoring systems
oIntegrated building management and security solutions
oLighting controls and digital addressable lighting systems
oRemote monitoring systems
oWater and wastewater treatment technologies
oWireless controls and monitoring systems
-Measure the current usage rate of the xxbuilding technologies and evaluate the impact that familiarity has on usage rates.
-Determine which building technologies have the highest and lowest growth potential via current usage and future likelihood to adopt variables.
-Identify what factors are most important in the decision making process.
-Evaluate the primary brand usage market of the xxbuilding technologies, uncovering areas of fragmentation or sole brand dominance.

Research Methodology

Methodology

A Web-based survey was utilized to survey respondents from June to July 2012.

Sample

The target group was pre-screened to ensure only qualified respondents participated.
Sample size included xxfacility managers, directors, and executives from the United States, distributed across nine different industries, with minimum quotas to ensure representativeness: Critical infrastructure (i.e., energy, telecommunications, and water), corporate office, education, financial services, industrial/manufacturing, mass transit, medical, retail, and services (general). The following two slides provide details related to representativeness and additional profile details.

Reporting Notes: Due to rounding, percentages in charts and tables may not add up to xx.

Executive Summary

The Relationship between Familiarity and Current Usage

Overall, among these highly experienced facility decision makers, familiarity with the xxtechnologies is high—with the exception of biosolids and sludge. While familiarity and current usage rates are related directional—in that those technologies that have higher levels of familiarity, also have higher levels of current uptake rates—there are significant gaps between current usage and familiarity. On average, there is a gap of xx percentage points across all xxtechnologies. Despite that facility decision makers know of these building technologies, they are not highly using them. Potentially changing messaging that focuses on facilities’ needs may increase uptake—specifically, leveraging the top factor that facility decision makers find important in their decision process: high reliability.

Potential for Growth Opportunities

Of the facility decision makers who are currently not using the various xx building technologies, the majority are likely to adopt within the next two years—categorized as the late majority. Cloud-based systems for security management have the greatest growth potential, with a potential growth rate of xx percent. Many other building technologies are projected to have greater than xx percent growth rates over the next two year—even biosolids and sludge, according to surveyed facility decision makers. Yet, the building technologies that currently have the highest usage rates—fire suppression and detection, air purification, remote monitoring, and wireless controls/monitoring systems—have lower potential growth rates.

Market Fragmentation or Sole Brand Dominance?

Overall, across all xx building technologies there is only a six percentage point gap between the most prevalently used brand and the runner-up brand. Furthermore, the top used brand for the majority of the technologies are only used by percent or less of surveyed facility decision makers’ organizations. In conclusion, the building technologies market is moderately fragmented. Water and wastewater treatment technologies is the only technology area where the most prevalently used brand has a gap of ten percentage points or greater over the runner-up brand. But, within fragmented markets there are opportunities. Brands will likely have to fight many to take the lead, yet, the lead is available for the taking.
Research Objectives and Methodology
Executive Summary
Overview of Building Technologies within Facilities
Usage: Primary Building Technology Brands
Appendices
The Frost & Sullivan Story